Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

tneva82 wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
But, but, according to the internet, every vehicle gets shot by a shadowsword turn 1!

Pretty much everything does if it doesnt' have 3++. But thing is trukk with that suggestion would have BETTER than 3++. Basically 2++ vs any D5 or better weapon...(technically only bit better than 4++ but that's because the 1 would be ridiculously high overkill)

Start handling out 2++'s like candies and sure shadowsword doesn't kill things. Is that really good for game? Do you want trukk to have that?

Your humor sense might be broken.

If I field three trukks, it's pretty unlikely that all three get hit by a shadowsword turn 1.

If I face eldar, the chances are even lower.

In basically every discussion on any vehicle on dakka someone claims "it sucks,/t is balanced, it dies to a shadowsword"

Ummm how that makes it good idea to make trukk able to survive being fired by volcano cannon? Why you are defending that idea so much? The idea is just laughably bad

Because my 6 trukks should be able to survive the six shadowswords shooting at me in a 2000 point game.

 Jidmah wrote:
Without mathing it out, I'd say 8 points for a burna feels about right - assuming pyromaniacs doesn't get some useful rule replacement.

Shoota Boy is 6pts, can shoot 2 shots at 18' range, so at 24 pts you can take 4, do 8 shots and get almost 3 hits a turn. In CC those 4 shoota boyz get 8 attacks, just about 6 hits and against T4 3+ save thats 3 wounds and 1 damage.

Burna boy at 8pts can shoot zero shots until within 8'. So at 24pts you can take 3 burna boyz, do zero damage until they are 10 inches closer then Shoota boyz, but when they are in range they do 6 S4 hits on average...almost exactly the same as the Shoota boyz. In CC they get 6 attacks, 4 hits and against T4 3+ armor they get 2 wounds and -2AP so the 3+ goes to 5+ meaning a 1/3rd chance to save x2. so roughly 1 Damage.

So at 8pts they are SLIGHTLY worse then a shoota boy, a Slugga boy is worse in shooting but significantly better at CC.

In my opinion a Burna boy without ANY buffs at the moment should be CHEAPER then a shoota boy because that 18' range makes them a hell of a lot more versatile and just better in general. If a Burna boy went to D6 shots...maybe 7pts, if they gave him armor 4+, 10pts a model would be justified.

 Jidmah wrote:
The trukk is already more durable per points than a battlewagon. Let that sink in.

Most people have stated that they would be fine with a trukk that has a buggy profile if it would cost half it does now.

The main issue with the trukk is not durability, but the huge cost it adds to the unit inside, making any potential passenger completely inefficient.

"This piece of crap is even more effective then this other bigger piece of crap"

whatever moron thought 80pts for a Trukk was a good idea shouldn't be allowed to work at GW anymore. I was skeptical of trukkz in 7th edition when they cost 30pts because they basically added 2.5pts to each boy inside and only made them faster (explosion + pinning test always screwed me over ) but in 8th? i have tried fielding them a couple of times and Ive lost basically every time because now instead of adding 2.5pts for every model inside it no adds something like 6.5pts to every model inside.

Cost is the #1 factor in making trukks useless. Durability is fine at the moment, but I am not going to transport 72pts of Boyz in a 80pt trukk that lacks any offensive capabilities at all beyond dropping passengers off and eating overwatch.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Without mathing it out, I'd say 8 points for a burna feels about right - assuming pyromaniacs doesn't get some useful rule replacement.

Shoota Boy is 6pts, can shoot 2 shots at 18' range, so at 24 pts you can take 4, do 8 shots and get almost 3 hits a turn. In CC those 4 shoota boyz get 8 attacks, just about 6 hits and against T4 3+ save thats 3 wounds and 1 damage.

Burna boy at 8pts can shoot zero shots until within 8'. So at 24pts you can take 3 burna boyz, do zero damage until they are 10 inches closer then Shoota boyz, but when they are in range they do 6 S4 hits on average...almost exactly the same as the Shoota boyz. In CC they get 6 attacks, 4 hits and against T4 3+ armor they get 2 wounds and -2AP so the 3+ goes to 5+ meaning a 1/3rd chance to save x2. so roughly 1 Damage.

So at 8pts they are SLIGHTLY worse then a shoota boy, a Slugga boy is worse in shooting but significantly better at CC.

In my opinion a Burna boy without ANY buffs at the moment should be CHEAPER then a shoota boy because that 18' range makes them a hell of a lot more versatile and just better in general. If a Burna boy went to D6 shots...maybe 7pts, if they gave him armor 4+, 10pts a model would be justified.

Good points. The main difference between burna boyz and shoota boyz to me would be that I could fit 20 burna boyz in a BW, but not 27 shoota boyz. But yeah, 6 points for a burna boy wouldn't be broken at all, plus it would even make sens to foot-slog them.

 Jidmah wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
Without mathing it out, I'd say 8 points for a burna feels about right - assuming pyromaniacs doesn't get some useful rule replacement.

Shoota Boy is 6pts, can shoot 2 shots at 18' range, so at 24 pts you can take 4, do 8 shots and get almost 3 hits a turn. In CC those 4 shoota boyz get 8 attacks, just about 6 hits and against T4 3+ save thats 3 wounds and 1 damage.

Burna boy at 8pts can shoot zero shots until within 8'. So at 24pts you can take 3 burna boyz, do zero damage until they are 10 inches closer then Shoota boyz, but when they are in range they do 6 S4 hits on average...almost exactly the same as the Shoota boyz. In CC they get 6 attacks, 4 hits and against T4 3+ armor they get 2 wounds and -2AP so the 3+ goes to 5+ meaning a 1/3rd chance to save x2. so roughly 1 Damage.

So at 8pts they are SLIGHTLY worse then a shoota boy, a Slugga boy is worse in shooting but significantly better at CC.

In my opinion a Burna boy without ANY buffs at the moment should be CHEAPER then a shoota boy because that 18' range makes them a hell of a lot more versatile and just better in general. If a Burna boy went to D6 shots...maybe 7pts, if they gave him armor 4+, 10pts a model would be justified.

Good points. The main difference between burna boyz and shoota boyz to me would be that I could fit 20 burna boyz in a BW, but not 27 shoota boyz. But yeah, 6 points for a burna boy wouldn't be broken at all, plus it would even make sens to foot-slog them.

very good points, and the only benefit I can think of beyond the transport capacity is the overwatch effect.

on the cost of vehicles, in 1st edition they had a formula to build them with, IIRC a Rhino was something silly like 370 points - it was decently durable but otherwise it didn't do a lot.

GW realised that this didn't feel right, the transport was essentially equipment for the squad - it shouldn't have a value higher than the squad, but nor should its abilities be game breaking when its made (significantly) cheaper.

They changed the rules, vehicles got cheaper, transports significantly so.

A trukk should be a lot cheaper, but just as flimsy as it currently is, its something boyz can use when they provide a reason to shoot elsewhere, or on a flank, serious fire should take one down easily - its not exactly a tank afterall, but it should be cheap enough almost not to care.

especially given the way transports work now, its a bit like a WW2 truck with a .50 cal on it, its useful but in the front line it won't last very long.

Trukks currently fit the bill that the Orks need to, take as many as possible and drown your opponent in targets. Though I do see them getting a bit of a points drop taking 6 squads of Boyz in Trukks still seems to work decently well.

 gmaleron wrote:
Trukks currently fit the bill that the Orks need to, take as many as possible and drown your opponent in targets. Though I do see them getting a bit of a points drop taking 6 squads of Boyz in Trukks still seems to work decently well.

Not if you play against a remotely competitive list. 6 Squads of Trukk Boyz in 7th was 66 Boyz (66x6 = 396pts) 6 Nobz with PKs (6x41= 246) and 6 Trukkz (6x30= 180) for a total of 822 and this wasn't winning tournaments. In 8th the same build is 72 Boyz and nobz (no difference in price anymore) (432pts) 6 Pks (78pts) and 6 Trukkz (492pts) for a grand total of 1002pts, and the best part? those PK nobz are no longer remotely scary. Not to even touch on the fact that most armies can remove 72 boyz in 2 turns without too much effort, especially with the new morale rules. So the cost has gone up 180pts and the lethality of the trukk boyz mob has drastically gone down and the durability has actually gone down because of the increase in opponents dakka and our loss of morale bonuses.

leopard wrote:
on the cost of vehicles, in 1st edition they had a formula to build them with, IIRC a Rhino was something silly like 370 points - it was decently durable but otherwise it didn't do a lot.

GW realised that this didn't feel right, the transport was essentially equipment for the squad - it shouldn't have a value higher than the squad, but nor should its abilities be game breaking when its made (significantly) cheaper.

They changed the rules, vehicles got cheaper, transports significantly so.

A trukk should be a lot cheaper, but just as flimsy as it currently is, its something boyz can use when they provide a reason to shoot elsewhere, or on a flank, serious fire should take one down easily - its not exactly a tank afterall, but it should be cheap enough almost not to care.

especially given the way transports work now, its a bit like a WW2 truck with a .50 cal on it, its useful but in the front line it won't last very long.

The issue is, you cannot half the cost of trukks without lowering their stats. If you drop them to 40 points you could just bring 10 trukks to the table and have them wall of portions of the game - not even Daemon Primarchs or Knights would have a chance to fight through 10 trukks before the game is over.

The points are about right for the trukk's current durability. Orks just have no need for a vehicle that is basically a rhino.

possibly dumb question, how do trukks interact with "the rule of three"?...can you take more than 3 trukks?

 ZoBo wrote:
possibly dumb question, how do trukks interact with "the rule of three"?...can you take more than 3 trukks?

Ded transports are exempt I believe

Correct. Trukks you are free to take at will in case codex actually manages to make them one you would like to take even 1 nevermind 4+.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:

The issue is, you cannot half the cost of trukks without lowering their stats. If you drop them to 40 points you could just bring 10 trukks to the table and have them wall of portions of the game - not even Daemon Primarchs or Knights would have a chance to fight through 10 trukks before the game is over.

The points are about right for the trukk's current durability. Orks just have no need for a vehicle that is basically a rhino.

Cost isn't "+1 for X stat equals Y points". Or at least shouldn't. If you try such formulastic approach you fail. Big time. The moment you try to go "+1A is worth Y points" you have failed in an attempt to get good point value for the model.

You have to look at what the model is worth as a whole. If trukk can't actually do anything useful at the current price it is not worth it. And durability is not be end and all...If you have model that is tough as hell but doesn't actually do anything it's something enemy can ignore. Similarly theoretical model that has A4 WS2+ with special rule that each hit automatically kills target automatically SOUNDS scary but if he's also T1 W1 no save M1" and comes in minimum squad of 30 he's actually worth practically almost nothing...(albeit such an extreme model would be hard to balance period)

tneva82 wrote:
Correct. Trukks you are free to take at will in case codex actually manages to make them one you would like to take even 1 nevermind 4+.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jidmah wrote:

The issue is, you cannot half the cost of trukks without lowering their stats. If you drop them to 40 points you could just bring 10 trukks to the table and have them wall of portions of the game - not even Daemon Primarchs or Knights would have a chance to fight through 10 trukks before the game is over.

The points are about right for the trukk's current durability. Orks just have no need for a vehicle that is basically a rhino.

Cost isn't "+1 for X stat equals Y points". Or at least shouldn't. If you try such formulastic approach you fail. Big time. The moment you try to go "+1A is worth Y points" you have failed in an attempt to get good point value for the model.

You have to look at what the model is worth as a whole. If trukk can't actually do anything useful at the current price it is not worth it. And durability is not be end and all...If you have model that is tough as hell but doesn't actually do anything it's something enemy can ignore. Similarly theoretical model that has A4 WS2+ with special rule that each hit automatically kills target automatically SOUNDS scary but if he's also T1 W1 no save M1" and comes in minimum squad of 30 he's actually worth practically almost nothing...(albeit such an extreme model would be hard to balance period)

Uh, you probably didn't understand my post.

If you dropped trukks to 40 points, without change, they would be completely OP because you could use them to wall in your enemy for the entire game. Guardsmen are a great unit because the are 4 points for 1 T3 5+ wound. Trukks at 40 points are 4 points for 1 T6 4+/ramshackle wound with 12" movement.
Trukks outperforming guardsmen is not a good idea, believe me - you'd just take trukks to park them on objectives because there is no gun in the game that can remove them efficiently.

There is no way to fix the trukk we have right now without changing its stats. You cannot price it according to make the unit inside efficient, because it becomes too durable per point. If you change it to carry more models it makes battlewagons obsolte.

Trukks used to be buggies, for some reason they were turned into rhinos in 8th. They need to go back to being buggies (T5/6W) - and then they can be priced properly.
If you gave orks access to (looted) rhinos with the same stats as marines get, we still wouldn't be using them.

Trukks sre good for tankbustas. I believe that's it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Multiwound models with no invul don't scale the duravility like infantry.

If you could take 16 boyz that are t8 and have a 4+ save for 10 ppm it would have been super broken. Not so much for a wagon.

 Jidmah wrote:

If you dropped trukks to 40 points, without change, they would be completely OP because you could use them to wall in your enemy for the entire game. Guardsmen are a great unit because the are 4 points for 1 T3 5+ wound. Trukks at 40 points are 4 points for 1 T6 4+/ramshackle wound with 12" movement.
Trukks outperforming guardsmen is not a good idea, believe me - you'd just take trukks to park them on objectives because there is no gun in the game that can remove them efficiently.

There is no way to fix the trukk we have right now without changing its stats. You cannot price it according to make the unit inside efficient, because it becomes too durable per point. If you change it to carry more models it makes battlewagons obsolte.

Trukks used to be buggies, for some reason they were turned into rhinos in 8th. They need to go back to being buggies (T5/6W) - and then they can be priced properly.
If you gave orks access to (looted) rhinos with the same stats as marines get, we still wouldn't be using them.

Guards are good because provide cheap chaff and more importantly infinent CP for others as part of soup. Remove soup and those guardsmen are much less of issue.

Grots provide 3pts effectively fearless wounds. Not issue. But then again they don't provide infinite CP to castellan and slamquinus either.

You seem to think durability is only thing that matters. IT DOES NOT! Unit needs to do other thing than just be durable. If something is durable but doesn't do anything it can be ignored. Hell trukks aren't even tough let alone actually doing anything...

And yes rhino's would be bad as well because they cost too much compared to unit inside. That's why you CAN'T JUST LOOK AT UNIT INDIVIDUALLY! Rhino in army X isn't worth same as rhino in army Y either so should cost differently between the armies.

 koooaei wrote:
Trukks sre good for tankbustas. I believe that's it.

That's simply because tankbustas are efficient enough to not suck after the 6.5 trukk tax

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Multiwound models with no invul don't scale the duravility like infantry.

If you could take 16 boyz that are t8 and have a 4+ save for 10 ppm it would have been super broken. Not so much for a wagon.

So T6 4+ guardsmen with 6+ FNP (roughly equivalent to ramshackle) for 8 ppm would be fine? Because that's what a trukk is right now.
On the other hand 16 boyz with T8 and 4+ save with 6 attacks hitting on 5+ between the 16 would completely suck. Just like the battlewagon.

You are comparing apples to oranges.

There is not a single weapon in the game that can efficiently kill a 40 point trukk, which is exactly the same reason why guardsmen are good.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
You seem to think durability is only thing that matters. IT DOES NOT! Unit needs to do other thing than just be durable. If something is durable but doesn't do anything it can be ignored. Hell trukks aren't even tough let alone actually doing anything...

Holy hell, work on your reading comprehension or stop posting. Read the goddamn posts before replying.

Are too thick to understand that a model that is too durable for its points is a problem? Mortarion rolling perfect hits and wounds ALL GAME cannot kill his points worth in trukks over the course of five turns if they cost 40 per model. Is that too hard to understand?

You could just put 400 points of trukk in every ork army, advance or assault with them 1 and block your enemy from moving out of his deployment zone by creating a 50" wall in front of them, and then lock down up to 10 units with them. You could just surround a Knight Galant or Daemon Primarch with them and prevent them from ever moving again. You could just put two on every objective and prevent it from being captured.

The only things that matter to transports are points, durability, speed and transport capacity.
Even if speed went up, the units inside are still inefficent, up to the point where they can make reliable turn 1 charges and they go from useless to OP.
If transport capacity or durability went up, you would simply make the trukk a battlewagon, what would the battlewagon be good for? Might as well just delete the trukk dataslate and drop points on battlewagons.
So the only things you actually can improve is the points, but at some point the unit becomes hard to kill efficiently, which has been a problem for all of 8th. Conscripts, Brimstones, Flyer spam, etc, etc. So unless you want to be just at incompetent at game design as GW is, must acknowledge this problem.

Trukks MUST get cheaper to be worthwhile. Trukks MUST NOT become cheaper without reducing their defensive stats.

And yes rhino's would be bad as well because they cost too much compared to unit inside. That's why you CAN'T JUST LOOK AT UNIT INDIVIDUALLY! Rhino in army X isn't worth same as rhino in army Y either so should cost differently between the armies.

Hurrdurr. Rhino is good for marines. Trukk is Rhino. Trukk is bad for orks. Rhino is bad orks. Trukk should not be rhino. Jidmah no mention points. You understand?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
Grots provide 3pts effectively fearless wounds.

That is a lie, by the way. There is no way to have 3ppm grots that do not lose large amount of models from moral.

The new prepared positions stratagem sounds like it could be very useful if you don’t get the first turn, makes trukks that little bit more resilient

Bod4242 wrote:
The new prepared positions stratagem sounds like it could be very useful if you don’t get the first turn, makes trukks that little bit more resilient

I’m disappointed zhardsnark still doesn’t have the correct and updated waaagh wording.
It could also be due to a change to waaagh in the codex so maybe!!! Because nothing ork related was touched in this faq.

Bod4242 wrote:
The new prepared positions stratagem sounds like it could be very useful if you don’t get the first turn, makes trukks that little bit more resilient

It sounds OK. Hardly groundbreaking.

I don't understand why some people seem to think this is a massive buff to melee armies? I don't think I've ever had a squad of Boyz benefit from cover and I run KFFs so I have a 5++ anyway. It's also not like melee armies were dominating the meta...

yeah, probably not a huge buff to our infantry as we have KFFs but 2 CP for the whole army isn't too bad and it for sure helps our vehicles. My dred mob will love it

Yeah, not awesome for orks on foot, but might help vehicle-centered lists if the codex makes those viable.

Nuck Fewton wrote:
yeah, probably not a huge buff to our infantry as we have KFFs but 2 CP for the whole army isn't too bad and it for sure helps our vehicles. My dred mob will love it

Not a huge help v actual anti tank guns with a good AP, but will be a nice boost v stuff with a high rate of fire and AP-1 thats flattens stuff through weight of fire.

to me this makes T1 flier attacks that little bit less nasty, and since its a strategem, if the situation makes it pointless, don't use it

I don't mind the 2CP thing because at the moment I never use all my CP, but realistically this isn't a buff for Orkz on the matchmaking scene. Going from 6+ to 5+ has us saving TWICE as many models.... so 22 boyz (132pts) go from losing 10 boyz to 12 wounds to losing 8 boyz to 12 wounds..or to put it a different way....12pts, on the other hand, 10 Space Marines (130pts) go from losing 4 Marines to 12 wounds to losing 2 Marines from 12 wounds, an increase of 26pts saved. So in other words....This doesn't really do a hell of a lot for Ork players, but its a nice boost to armies with good saves.

As said before this is a benefit to trukk boys and dread mobs. greentides probably didn’t need the boost. However it’s hard to tell if this faq does anything for us since they purposefully didn’t touch anything ork related this faq.

gungo wrote:
As said before this is a benefit to trukk boys and dread mobs. greentides probably didn’t need the boost. However it’s hard to tell if this faq does anything for us since they purposefully didn’t touch anything ork related this faq.

When the Ork codex is released in November we'll get a FAQ for that a month later.

SemperMortis wrote:
I don't mind the 2CP thing because at the moment I never use all my CP, but realistically this isn't a buff for Orkz on the matchmaking scene. Going from 6+ to 5+ has us saving TWICE as many models.... so 22 boyz (132pts) go from losing 10 boyz to 12 wounds to losing 8 boyz to 12 wounds..or to put it a different way....12pts, on the other hand, 10 Space Marines (130pts) go from losing 4 Marines to 12 wounds to losing 2 Marines from 12 wounds, an increase of 26pts saved. So in other words....This doesn't really do a hell of a lot for Ork players, but its a nice boost to armies with good saves.

But reducing casualties only by 20%. Sounds good saying "twice" but opposite viewpoint is 20%...This is bigger help the bigger save you already have so from orks def vehicles. Going from 3+ to 2+ is bigger than going from 6+ to 5+.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eonfuzz wrote:

gungo wrote:
As said before this is a benefit to trukk boys and dread mobs. greentides probably didn’t need the boost. However it’s hard to tell if this faq does anything for us since they purposefully didn’t touch anything ork related this faq.

When the Ork codex is released in November we'll get a FAQ for that a month later.

October.-

Orks seem horrifying post FAQ and with the codex looming.

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
Orks seem horrifying post FAQ and with the codex looming.

Elaborate? You've piqued my interest.

That's Nick Nanavati's opinion. The all in cover stratagem is insane for orks. Also the enemy can fly over them. Also the +1 to charge leaks. Also the 20PL deepstrike leak... it's pretty good.